Creation???

[rollinTHUNDER]

A thousand years in your sight are like a day [yom] that has just gone by, or like a watch in the night. - Psalm 90:4

So a sentence from a Psalm, in which the writer was making a point about eternity, can be taken literally, and you can base the entire timing of God’s creation on the one sentence?

If that is the case, this woman has a real problem.....

Son 4:2 Thy teeth are like a flock of sheep that are even shorn, which came up from the washing; whereof every one bear twins, and none is barren among them.

Hi Fez,

I'm not sure what you mean here, nor am I familiar with Son 4:2.

But no, there is more than just one sentence. Here's another from the New Testament:

But forget not this one thing, beloved, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some count slackness; but is longsuffering to you-ward, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. (2 Peter 3:8-9)

To clarify Fez's typo ...

Song of Solomon 4:2

Your teeth are like a flock of shorn sheep

Which have come up from the washing,

Every one of which bears twins,

And none is barren among them.

Any scripture relating to how a day is like a thousand years is speaking to how God is timeless.

THis statement cannot be used to create a literal timeline.

Okay, well that settles it then.

[goldust59]

A thousand years in your sight are like a day [yom] that has just gone by, or like a watch in the night. - Psalm 90:4

So a sentence from a Psalm, in which the writer was making a point about eternity, can be taken literally, and you can base the entire timing of God’s creation on the one sentence?

If that is the case, this woman has a real problem.....

Son 4:2 Thy teeth are like a flock of sheep that are even shorn, which came up from the washing; whereof every one bear twins, and none is barren among them.

Hi Fez,

I'm not sure what you mean here, nor am I familiar with Son 4:2.

But no, there is more than just one sentence. Here's another from the New Testament:

But forget not this one thing, beloved, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some count slackness; but is longsuffering to you-ward, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. (2 Peter 3:8-9)

Peter was not giving a formula. He was using a figure of speech to make a more important point. He was addressing scoffers who misinterpreted Jesus' delay in returning as a sign that Jesus was not keeping his promises. It was a form of mockery of the Christian's hope of the return of Christ. Peter's response was that from God's perspective, he is not slack or late at all. The Lord's delay is an act of mercy giving the scoffers ample opportunity to repent. People run this comment by Peter to erect prophetic timelines and Peter was not even talking about the end times, per se. So, this should not be used to address Bible prophecy or to create a time line. We do not have enough light for understanding God's timing for future events.

Although I believe the creation is a literal 6 day creation, I still think that the 1000years=a day is more significant than just being a figure of speech. I believe it ties in to where God told Adam that he would die the same 'day' he ate of the tree of knowledge. No man lived to the age of 1000. I think it somehow ties to the 1000 yr reign too.

[rollinTHUNDER]

A thousand years in your sight are like a day [yom] that has just gone by, or like a watch in the night. - Psalm 90:4

So a sentence from a Psalm, in which the writer was making a point about eternity, can be taken literally, and you can base the entire timing of God’s creation on the one sentence?

If that is the case, this woman has a real problem.....

Son 4:2 Thy teeth are like a flock of sheep that are even shorn, which came up from the washing; whereof every one bear twins, and none is barren among them.

Hi Fez,

I'm not sure what you mean here, nor am I familiar with Son 4:2.

But no, there is more than just one sentence. Here's another from the New Testament:

But forget not this one thing, beloved, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some count slackness; but is longsuffering to you-ward, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. (2 Peter 3:8-9)

Peter was not giving a formula. He was using a figure of speech to make a more important point. He was addressing scoffers who misinterpreted Jesus' delay in returning as a sign that Jesus was not keeping his promises. It was a form of mockery of the Christian's hope of the return of Christ. Peter's response was that from God's perspective, he is not slack or late at all. The Lord's delay is an act of mercy giving the scoffers ample opportunity to repent. People run this comment by Peter to erect prophetic timelines and Peter was not even talking about the end times, per se. So, this should not be used to address Bible prophecy or to create a time line. We do not have enough light for understanding God's timing for future events.

No one claimed that Peter was giving a formula of any sort. However, the end time is clearly visible in 2 Peter 3.

But since when were you given the authority to tell people what should or should not be addressed relating to Bible prophecy? I was not aware that we had to follow your rules here, or to see things the way that you see them. Good grief!!!

[Guest shiloh357]

No one claimed that Peter was giving a formula of any sort. However, the end time is clearly visible in 2 Peter 3.

You are approaching it like a forumula. And Peter's point was not eschatological. He was simply explaining the true nature of God's delay.

But since when were you given the authority to tell people what should or should not be addressed relating to Bible prophecy?

That is not what I am doing. I am saying that the context does not allow for this to be used as an eschatological way of determining how time operates with God.

I was not aware that we had to follow your rules here, or to see things the way that you see them. Good grief!!!

I am just pointing to what the passage is saying. You can lose the snippy attitude.

Although I believe the creation is a literal 6 day creation, I still think that the 1000years=a day is more significant than just being a figure of speech. I believe it ties in to where God told Adam that he would die the same 'day' he ate of the tree of knowledge. No man lived to the age of 1000. I think it somehow ties to the 1000 yr reign too.

In Peter, all he is doing is using the 1,000 years as a similie. That is all that is there. In Psalms it is comparing the temporary, transitory existence of man with the eternal and unchanging nature of God. Neither Scripture has an eschatological context. Trying to force something prophetic on to it may good for "oohs" and "ahhs" and goose bumps, but it doesn't really represent the truth of the passages under consideration.

[goldust59]

No one claimed that Peter was giving a formula of any sort. However, the end time is clearly visible in 2 Peter 3.

You are approaching it like a forumula. And Peter's point was not eschatological. He was simply explaining the true nature of God's delay.

But since when were you given the authority to tell people what should or should not be addressed relating to Bible prophecy?

That is not what I am doing. I am saying that the context does not allow for this to be used as an eschatological way of determining how time operates with God.

I was not aware that we had to follow your rules here, or to see things the way that you see them. Good grief!!!

I am just pointing to what the passage is saying. You can lose the snippy attitude.

Although I believe the creation is a literal 6 day creation, I still think that the 1000years=a day is more significant than just being a figure of speech. I believe it ties in to where God told Adam that he would die the same 'day' he ate of the tree of knowledge. No man lived to the age of 1000. I think it somehow ties to the 1000 yr reign too.

In Peter, all he is doing is using the 1,000 years as a similie. That is all that is there. In Psalms it is comparing the temporary, transitory existence of man with the eternal and unchanging nature of God. Neither Scripture has an eschatological context. Trying to force something prophetic on to it may good for "oohs" and "ahhs" and goose bumps, but it doesn't really represent the truth of the passages under consideration.

How have you arrived at the conclusion that it is just a simile?

[Guest shiloh357]

How have you arrived at the conclusion that it is just a simile?

Grammatical structure. When a comparison is made using "like" or "as" it is a similie. When the Bible says, that the voice of the Lord sounded as a trumpet (Rev. 1:10), it is a similie. The voice of the Lord is not sounding like an actual trumpet, but it s the volume that is in view.

When Peter says, 1000 years with God is "as a day," it is not point for point comparison. He is not saying that 1,000 years is 24 hours to God. He is challenging the view of the scoffers who think a lot of time has passed and Christ has not returned and it serves as a chalenge to God's integirty. He is simply pointing out that there is nothing that requires God to hasten His return in order to protect His integrity or to justify His promises to the scoffers. Rather, what appears as a delay to the scoffers is really an act of mercy because as Peter goes on to say, it is not God's will that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

[goldust59]

How have you arrived at the conclusion that it is just a simile?

Grammatical structure. When a comparison is made using "like" or "as" it is a similie. When the Bible says, that the voice of the Lord sounded as a trumpet (Rev. 1:10), it is a similie. The voice of the Lord is not sounding like an actual trumpet, but it s the volume that is in view.

When Peter says, 1000 years with God is "as a day," it is not point for point comparison. He is not saying that 1,000 years is 24 hours to God. He is challenging the view of the scoffers who think a lot of time has passed and Christ has not returned and it serves as a chalenge to God's integirty. He is simply pointing out that there is nothing that requires God to hasten His return in order to protect His integrity or to justify His promises to the scoffers. Rather, what appears as a delay to the scoffers is really an act of mercy because as Peter goes on to say, it is not God's will that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

I understand what you are saying here, but I think it is speaking of how God views a day, not that it is 24 hrs to Him. I will however study on it from the perspective you put forth & see where that takes me. Thanks for your answer.

[rollinTHUNDER]

How have you arrived at the conclusion that it is just a simile?

Grammatical structure. When a comparison is made using "like" or "as" it is a similie. When the Bible says, that the voice of the Lord sounded as a trumpet (Rev. 1:10), it is a similie. The voice of the Lord is not sounding like an actual trumpet, but it s the volume that is in view.

When Peter says, 1000 years with God is "as a day," it is not point for point comparison. He is not saying that 1,000 years is 24 hours to God. He is challenging the view of the scoffers who think a lot of time has passed and Christ has not returned and it serves as a chalenge to God's integirty. He is simply pointing out that there is nothing that requires God to hasten His return in order to protect His integrity or to justify His promises to the scoffers. Rather, what appears as a delay to the scoffers is really an act of mercy because as Peter goes on to say, it is not God's will that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

That settles it. Just keep everything neatly packed inside this little box and everything will be just fine. No need to try and look for anything deeper.

Everyone just move along, there is nothing else to be seen here.

[goldust59]

How have you arrived at the conclusion that it is just a simile?

Grammatical structure. When a comparison is made using "like" or "as" it is a similie. When the Bible says, that the voice of the Lord sounded as a trumpet (Rev. 1:10), it is a similie. The voice of the Lord is not sounding like an actual trumpet, but it s the volume that is in view.

When Peter says, 1000 years with God is "as a day," it is not point for point comparison. He is not saying that 1,000 years is 24 hours to God. He is challenging the view of the scoffers who think a lot of time has passed and Christ has not returned and it serves as a chalenge to God's integirty. He is simply pointing out that there is nothing that requires God to hasten His return in order to protect His integrity or to justify His promises to the scoffers. Rather, what appears as a delay to the scoffers is really an act of mercy because as Peter goes on to say, it is not God's will that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

That settles it. Just keep everything neatly packed inside this little box and everything will be just fine. No need to try and look for anything deeper.

Everyone just move along, there is nothing else to be seen here.

[~candice~]

How have you arrived at the conclusion that it is just a simile?

Grammatical structure. When a comparison is made using "like" or "as" it is a similie. When the Bible says, that the voice of the Lord sounded as a trumpet (Rev. 1:10), it is a similie. The voice of the Lord is not sounding like an actual trumpet, but it s the volume that is in view.

When Peter says, 1000 years with God is "as a day," it is not point for point comparison. He is not saying that 1,000 years is 24 hours to God. He is challenging the view of the scoffers who think a lot of time has passed and Christ has not returned and it serves as a chalenge to God's integirty. He is simply pointing out that there is nothing that requires God to hasten His return in order to protect His integrity or to justify His promises to the scoffers. Rather, what appears as a delay to the scoffers is really an act of mercy because as Peter goes on to say, it is not God's will that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

That settles it. Just keep everything neatly packed inside this little box and everything will be just fine. No need to try and look for anything deeper.

Everyone just move along, there is nothing else to be seen here.

It's really up to you to demonstrate that there is something deeper in the text. Why don't you address that instead of this mockery? All Shiloh did was point out that the verse is not appropriate to be used to determine the length of creation. This thread is going downhill fast...